EIN Presswire: International Employment Press Releases http://www.einpresswire.com/all/employment Constantly updated news and information about EIN Presswire. Copyright 1995-2017 IPD Group, Inc. All Right Reserved. Houston Jury Awards $6.4M In Hospital Defamation Case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/374202394/houston-jury-awards-6-4m-in-hospital-defamation-case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/374202394/houston-jury-awards-6-4m-in-hospital-defamation-case <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2017-04-03">04/03/2017</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> On March 29, 2017, the jury in the case of <em>Gomez v. Memorial Hermann Hosp. Syst.</em>, rendered a verdict against Memorial Hermann in the amount $6.4 million for defaming Dr. Gomez’s reputation and making false statements about his surgical competence. Dr. Gomez sued Memorial Hermann almost five years ago, alleging that it misused the peer review process and manipulated data to harm his practice after he tried to move to another hospital.</p> <p> Mr. Gomez, a heart surgeon in Houston, Texas, decided to move his practice to Houston Methodist West because of concerns he was having at Memorial Hermann's business practices. In response, doctors at Memorial Hermann joined together to destroy Dr. Gomez’s reputation and prevent patients from following him to Methodist. They manipulated statistical data and misused the peer review process for the financial gain of Memorial Hermann. The jury found that Memorial Hermann made false statements about Dr. Gomez’s surgical competence and mortality rates and shared falsified peer review data with referring cardiologists.  In turn, Dr. Gomez’s reputation was harmed.</p> <p> This is an unusual verdict for a defamation case. Although, Memorial Hermann believes judge Daryl Moore will reduce the award when he enters the judgment, Texas hospitals should now be cognizant of abusing the peer review process to protect their pecuniary interests.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about employer defamation, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705.</p> <p> This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> Mon, 03 Apr 2017 15:19:03 GMT Fort Worth Court Of Appeals Finds Online Arbitration Policy Unenforceable http://www.einpresswire.com/article/373444029/fort-worth-court-of-appeals-finds-online-arbitration-policy-unenforceable http://www.einpresswire.com/article/373444029/fort-worth-court-of-appeals-finds-online-arbitration-policy-unenforceable <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2017-03-29">03/29/2017</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Dallas employment attorney Keith Clouse stresses the importance of expressly notifying employees of company arbitration policies. Many companies use online acknowledgments to enter into arbitration agreements with employees. However, under Texas law, these are only enforceable if the employee received notice of the policy and accepted it. A recent opinion from the Fort Worth Court of Appeals demonstrates some of the challenges companies may face with enforcing online arbitration policies.</p> <p> In <em>Doe v. Columbia N. Hills Hosp., et al.</em>, Columbia tried to enforce an arbitration policy that was posted on its intranet website. However, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals found that Doe was not <em>expressly</em> notified of the arbitration policy. “Merely posting an arbitration policy on an intranet site is insufficient to give an employee notice.” Moreover, Columbia provided no evidence that Doe actually accessed the intranet site. Because Doe did not have notice of the arbitration policy, the trial court abused its discretion in compelling arbitration.</p> <p> Companies should expressly notify employees of online arbitration policies and, if possible, have employees sign and acknowledge receipt of the arbitration polices.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about company arbitration policies, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> Wed, 29 Mar 2017 15:49:46 GMT Your Duty To Preserve Includes Social Media http://www.einpresswire.com/article/365795479/your-duty-to-preserve-includes-social-media http://www.einpresswire.com/article/365795479/your-duty-to-preserve-includes-social-media <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/NewsArticle"> <p itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><h3>The most effective way to inform your clients of their duty to preserve is to include a detailed preservation provision in their retainer agreement</h3></p> <p> <span aria-hidden="true"></span>February 09</p> <div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2017-02-09">02/09/2017</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Dallas employment lawyer Keith Clouse recommends lawyers talk with their clients about preserving their social media accounts. A party has a duty to preserve evidence that will be material and relevant to any claims at issue. This duty includes social networking platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. Nowadays, social media is more likely to contain relevant information, which sometimes may be unfavorable to a client. Whether the information is embarrassing or simply personal, clients may alter or delete posts and comments without understanding the repercussions of their actions.</p> <p> The most effective way to inform clients of their duty to preserve is to include a detailed preservation provision in their retainer agreement. Inform clients that altering or destroying evidence may result in monetary penalties and/or an adverse inference instruction to the jury. A preservation provision will not only advise your clients to preserve evidence, but it will also protect lawyers from being sanctioned if a client does not comply.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> </div> </div> Thu, 09 Feb 2017 20:00:04 GMT Preservation Steps For Executives Anticipating Litigation http://www.einpresswire.com/article/343866443/preservation-steps-for-executives-anticipating-litigation http://www.einpresswire.com/article/343866443/preservation-steps-for-executives-anticipating-litigation <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/NewsArticle"> <p itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><h3>Dallas employment lawyer Keith Clouse suggests that executives take these preservation steps if anticipating litigation for misappropriation of trade secrets</h3></p> <p> <span aria-hidden="true"></span>September 08</p> <div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-09-08">09/08/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Dallas employment lawyer Keith Clouse suggests that executives take these preservation steps if anticipating litigation for <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/dallas-trade-secret-attorney-texas-adopts-uniform-code_9972.html">misappropriation of trade secrets</a>.</p> <p>         1.  Image your personal computer and email. Preserving the metadata on your personal devices is extremely important. Most employers will accuse you of stealing or misappropriating confidential information and trade secrets. To protect yourself, preserve this information as close to your termination or resignation as possible.</p> <p>         2.  Don’t forget to image your phone. We forget that sometimes relevant evidence can be stored in text messages or photographs on your phone. Because losing, destroying, or altering data is far greater on a phone, it is necessary to preserve this information as soon as possible.</p> <p>         3.  Prevent inadvertent spoliation. Be sure to turn off all automatic deletions and syncing features on your devices. Although you may not intend to delete emails or documents, automatic deletion settings may erase relevant information and alter metadata.</p> <p> Proactively preserving data helps the litigation process go smoothly and guarantees that evidence has not been altered or destroyed. To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> </div> </div> Thu, 08 Sep 2016 22:08:59 GMT Private University Graduates Can Unionize http://www.einpresswire.com/article/342919058/private-university-graduates-can-unionize http://www.einpresswire.com/article/342919058/private-university-graduates-can-unionize <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/NewsArticle"> <p itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><h3>Graduate students are employees.</h3></p> <p> <span aria-hidden="true"></span>September 02</p> <div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-09-02">09/02/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> A win for graduate student employees--the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has overturned a 2005 Brown University decision and ruled that graduate students working as teachers and research assistants at private universities are employees.  The NLRB issued a 3 to 1 decision in <a href="https://www.nlrb.gov/case/02-RC-143012">Columbia University</a> where they determined “whether students who perform services at a university in connection with their studies are statutory employees within the meaning of Section 2(3) of the National Labor Relations Act” (the “Act”).</p> <p> The NLRB held “that student assistants who have a common-law employment relationship with their university are statutory employees under the [National Labor Relations] Act.”  As a result, student assistants at private colleges and universities are permitted to unionize.  The decision is a triumph for many graduate students and unions throughout the country.  Columbia officials, of course, disagree with the ruling and contend that a student’s relationship with an academic department is not the same as an employee’s relationship with his or her employer.  That said, it is likely that Columbia University will appeal this decision.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> </div> </div> Fri, 02 Sep 2016 15:30:00 GMT Choosing The Right Forensic Examiner http://www.einpresswire.com/article/341130881/choosing-the-right-forensic-examiner http://www.einpresswire.com/article/341130881/choosing-the-right-forensic-examiner <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-08-22">08/22/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Forensic analysis may seem like a daunting task, but do not let it deter you.  Although typically used in investigating computer crimes, forensic analysis has become prevalent in civil cases, especially employment law disputes.  As computers are used more regularly in the workplace, employers are finding themselves conducting forensics on employee’s desktops and laptops more frequently than ever.  The caveat, however, is choosing the right forensic examiner and getting them involved from the onset.</p> <p> Selecting a qualified expert may be critical to your case.  An experienced and knowledgeable forensic analyst will ensure proper collection and processing of evidence and metadata, which in turn makes it easier to use such information at trial. An inexperienced expert cannot only cause the omission of evidence but can sometimes permanently destroy relevant information during the collection process. Thus, in choosing an expert their credentials are important. Make sure they are familiar with the tasks at hand and can competently and coherently convey their forensic results to a layperson.  Moreover, choose a neutral examiner. While this may seem unfavorable, a neutral examiner will cover all bases rather than focus on the tasks at hand.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about workplace matters, send an email to <a href="mailto:debra@clousedunn.com">debra@clousedunn.com</a> or call <a href="file://localhost/tel/%2528214%2529%20239-2705">(214) 239-2705</a>. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p>  </p> </div> Mon, 22 Aug 2016 15:57:43 GMT Employee Gun Rights http://www.einpresswire.com/article/340273977/employee-gun-rights http://www.einpresswire.com/article/340273977/employee-gun-rights <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-08-16">08/16/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> The Fifth Circuit, in a case of first impression, decided <a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-60779-CV1.pdf"><em>Swindol v. Aurora Flight Scis. Corp.</em></a> on August 8, 2016, and created a new exception to the employment-at-will doctrine. The decision was based on Mississippi Supreme Court’s interpretation of Mississippi Code Section 45-9-55, which is similar to <a href="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/LA/htm/LA.52.htm">Texas Labor Code Section 52.061</a>. Section 45-9-55 provides that “a public or private employer may not establish, maintain, or enforce any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting a person from transporting or storing a firearm in a locked vehicle in any parking lot, parking garage, or other designated parking area.”</p> <p> A Mississippi employee was fired for violating company policy by storing a firearm in his locked car on company property and thereafter sued his employer for wrongful discharge. The following question was certified to the Mississippi Supreme Court: “Whether in Mississippi an employer may be liable for wrongful discharge of an employee for storing a firearm in a locked vehicle on company property in a manner that is consistent with Section 45-9-55.” The Mississippi Supreme Court answered this question in the affirmative.</p> <p> Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit held that under Section 45-9-55, it is “legally impermissible” to terminate an employee for having a firearm inside his locked vehicle on company property, thereby creating an exception to the employment-at-will doctrine.</p> <p> Although <em>Swindol</em> is not binding on Texas courts, the Fifth Circuit opinion may provide some guidance to Texas courts that may interpret similar issues under Texas law. Employers should be cautious and review their company policies and handbooks to ensure they are not prohibiting permissive firearm storage under existing laws.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to <a href="http://debra@clousedunn.com">debra@clousedunn.com</a> or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> Tue, 16 Aug 2016 20:32:14 GMT A New Federal Claim For The Theft Of Trade Secrets http://www.einpresswire.com/article/339185910/a-new-federal-claim-for-the-theft-of-trade-secrets http://www.einpresswire.com/article/339185910/a-new-federal-claim-for-the-theft-of-trade-secrets <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-08-09">08/09/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> President Obama signed into law the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1890/text">Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016</a> (“DTSA”). For the first time, companies and employers have a federal civil remedy for an employee’s misappropriation of trade secrets. In general, “[a]n owner of a trade secret that is misappropriated may bring a civil action under [the DTSA] if the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce.” If this jurisdictional burden is not met, an employer’s only remedy may be under the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act.</p> <p> As courts begin to hear cases brought under DTSA, what should employers take away today?</p> <p> (1)  Whistleblower Notice Provision:</p> <p> Employers must update their confidentiality agreements to include a “whistleblower” notice provision. The DTSA requires employers to provide employees with notice of their immunity from DTSA liability should they disclose trade secrets to government officials for the sole purpose of reporting or investigating suspected violations of the law. 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b)(1). Failure to do so could prohibit recovery of exemplary damages and attorneys’ fees that may otherwise be available under the DTSA.</p> <p> (2)  Ex Parte Orders:</p> <p> The DTSA also provides for ex parte orders “providing for the seizure of property necessary to prevent the propagation or dissemination of the trade secret that is the subject of the action.”18 U.S.C. § 1836(b)(2)(A)(i). The burden to obtain this civil seizure procedure is stringent and is only available in extraordinary circumstances. However, it is important to note, the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act does not have a similar provision.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> Tue, 09 Aug 2016 20:00:46 GMT OSHA Issues A Final Rule On Tracking Workplace Injuries & Illnesses http://www.einpresswire.com/article/338078663/osha-issues-a-final-rule-on-tracking-workplace-injuries-illnesses http://www.einpresswire.com/article/338078663/osha-issues-a-final-rule-on-tracking-workplace-injuries-illnesses <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/NewsArticle"> <p itemprop="alternativeHeadline"><h3>“Starting January 1, 2017, employers must electronically submit workplace injuries and illnesses”</h3></p> <p> <span aria-hidden="true"></span>August 02</p> <div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-08-02">08/02/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> The Occupational Safety &amp; Health Administration (“OSHA”) has issued a final rule revising its Recording and Reporting Occupational Injuries and Illnesses regulation. <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-12/pdf/2016-10443.pdf">29 C.F.R. §§ 1902, 1904 (2016)</a>. Starting January 1, 2017, employers must electronically submit workplace injuries and illnesses. Employers are already required to record this information on their onsite OSHA <a href="https://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/RKforms.html">Injury &amp; Illness Recordkeeping Forms</a>; however, this new system allows OSHA to post the submission data on a publicly accessible website. The new system will “’nudge’ employers to prevent worker injuries and illnesses to demonstrate to Investors, job seekers, customers and the public they operate safe and well-managed facilities. Access to injury data will also help OSHA better target compliance assistance and enforcement resources, and enable ‘big data’ researchers to apply their skills to making workplaces safer.”  <em>Dr. David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.</em></p> <p> The final rule updates an employer’s obligation to inform its workers of their right to report work-related injuries and illnesses without fear of retaliation, and clarifies that an employer’s procedure for reporting work-related injuries and illnesses must be “reasonable and not deter or discourage employees from reporting.”  <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-05-12/pdf/2016-10443.pdf">29 C.F.R. §§ 1902, 1904 (2016)</a>.  The main purpose of the electronic data collection is to better identify and mitigate workplace hazards and thereby provide safe and healthy working conditions to employees. </p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about workplace matters, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> <p> <span displaytext="Pinterest"></span> <span displaytext="Tweet"></span> <span displaytext="LinkedIn"></span> <span displaytext="Google +"></span> <span displaytext="Facebook"></span> <span displaytext="Email"></span> <span displaytext="Print"></span> </p> </div> </div> Tue, 02 Aug 2016 21:26:25 GMT The White House Speaks On Non-Compete Agreements http://www.einpresswire.com/article/335646592/the-white-house-speaks-on-non-compete-agreements http://www.einpresswire.com/article/335646592/the-white-house-speaks-on-non-compete-agreements <div itemprop="articleBody"> <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-07-18">07/18/2016</time> <b>(press release: cdklawyers)</b> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span></span></span> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> On May 5, 2016, the White House issued a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/non-competes_report_final2.pdf">report</a> on non-compete agreements.  Employers provide non-competes to protect their trade secrets and confidential information.  However, the US Treasury Department found that non-competes are often given to workers that do not possess trade secrets.  When used appropriately, non-competes can play an important role in protecting a business, but in some cases, they impose substantial costs to workers and hinder the economy.</p> <p> The White House has presented seven (7) potential issues with non-competes:</p> <p>          1.    Workers who are unlikely to possess trade secrets are nonetheless compelled to sign non-competes;</p> <p>          2.    Workers are asked to sign non-competes only after accepting a job offer, when they have already declined other offers and thus have less leverage to bargain;</p> <p>          3.    Non-competes, their implications, and their enforceability are often unclear to workers;</p> <p>          4.    Employers often write non-compete agreements that are overly broad or unenforceable;</p> <p>          5.    Employers requiring non-competes often do not provide “consideration” that is above and beyond continued employment;</p> <p>          6.    In some cases, non-competes can prevent workers from finding new employment even after being fired without cause; and</p> <p>          7.    In some sectors, non-competes can have a detrimental effect on health and well-being by restricting consumer choice.</p> <p> These issues can and should be avoided.  Texas employers should take <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/key-considerations-regarding-non-compete-agreements_13797.html">steps</a> to address these potential issues, which may increase an employer’s ability to enforce a non-compete agreement.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about non-compete agreements, send an email to <a href="http://debra@clousedunn.com">debra@clousedunn.com</a> or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> </div> Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:32:54 GMT Fifth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment in ADA Case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/309589054/fifth-circuit-reverses-summary-judgment-in-ada-case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/309589054/fifth-circuit-reverses-summary-judgment-in-ada-case <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-01-24">01/24/2016</time> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span>, <span itemprop="addressCountry">United States</span></span></span> // <a rel="nofollow" href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com">Attorney Keith Clouse</a> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed summary judgment for an employer in an Americans with Disabilities Act matter. <em>Cannon v. Jacobs Field Servs. N. Am,. Inc</em>., No. 15-20127 (5th Cir. Jan. 13, 2016), available at <a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-20127-CV0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-20127-CV0.pdf</a>. The plaintiff received a job offer. The company doctor then conducted a pre-employment examination and cleared the plaintiff for the position as long as the company made accommodations for the plaintiff’s rotator cuff injury. After receiving the doctor’s report, the company rescinded the job offer. The plaintiff filed suit, and the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the employer.</p> <p> The Court reversed the summary judgment. First, the Court held that evidence supported a finding that the plaintiff suffered from a disability that resulted in a substantial impairment. The Court then evaluated whether the plaintiff could perform the essential functions of the job either in spite of his disability or with a reasonable accommodation. The Court concluded that the plaintiff provided some evidence to support a finding that he could perform the essential elements of the job, so summary judgment was inappropriate. Finally, the Court determined that, because the plaintiff’s <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/engaging-in-the-interactive-process_13465.html" target="_blank">failure-to-accommodate claim</a> was not addressed by the district court, it should be addressed on remand.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about the Americans with Disabilities Act, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p><b>Contact Keith Clouse</b> </p> <p><strong>KEITH A. CLOUSE</strong> </p> <p>Clouse Dunn LLP </p> <p>214.220.2722 214.220.3833 ( fax) keith@clousedunn.com</p> Tue, 02 Feb 2016 18:31:44 GMT Duty to Accommodate a Newly Hired Employee http://www.einpresswire.com/article/309589074/duty-to-accommodate-a-newly-hired-employee http://www.einpresswire.com/article/309589074/duty-to-accommodate-a-newly-hired-employee <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-01-24">01/24/2016</time> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span>, <span itemprop="addressCountry">United States</span></span></span> // <a rel="nofollow" href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com">Attorney Keith Clouse</a> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Most employers know they have a duty under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act to accommodate an employee’s disability. Some employers, however, may not realize that this duty extends to newly-hired individuals, even before they start working for the employer.</p> <p> In a recent case before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the plaintiff alleged that his job offer had been rescinded after he underwent a pre-employment physical examination. <em>Cannon v. Jacobs Field Servs. N. Am., Inc</em>., No. 15-20127 (5th Cir. Jan. 13, 2016), available at <a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-20127-CV0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/15/15-20127-CV0.pdf</a>. The doctor cleared the plaintiff for the position as long as the company accommodated his disability. The company immediately rescinded the plaintiff’s job offer without further exploration of the plaintiff’s impairment or determining whether the requested accommodations could be made. The Court noted that there was little argument to be made that the employer engaged in the interactive process as required by law.</p> <p> The take-away lesson for an employer is to understand that a <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/engaging-in-the-interactive-process_13465.html" target="_blank">duty to engage in the interactive process</a> exists even before a newly-hired employee begins work. An employer must take steps to determine if the individual’s disability may be accommodated and must work with the individual to attempt to find a solution.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about disability accommodations, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p><b>Contact Keith Clouse</b> </p> <p><strong>KEITH A. CLOUSE</strong> </p> <p>Clouse Dunn LLP </p> <p>214.220.2722 214.220.3833 ( fax) keith@clousedunn.com</p> Tue, 02 Feb 2016 18:31:43 GMT Fifth Circuit Remands Discrimination Case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/307362809/fifth-circuit-remands-discrimination-case http://www.einpresswire.com/article/307362809/fifth-circuit-remands-discrimination-case <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-01-17">01/17/2016</time> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span>, <span itemprop="addressCountry">United States</span></span></span> // <a rel="nofollow" href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com">Attorney Keith Clouse</a> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed in part and vacated in part a discrimination and retaliation case. <em>Wheat v. Fl. Parish Juv. Justice Comm’n</em>, No. 14-30788 (5th Cir. Jan. 5, 2016), available at <a href="http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30788-CV0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/14/14-30788-CV0.pdf</a>.</p> <p> The plaintiff worked in a juvenile detention center. After taking Family and Medical Leave Act leave, her employment was terminated, but she was later reinstated. Upon her return, she was discharged after she was involved in an altercation with a juvenile. She alleged that she was discharged in <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/retaliation-cases_12006.html" target="_blank">retaliation for asserting her rights</a> under the FMLA and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for having complained about a juvenile’s sexual advances.</p> <p> The Court first examined three pre-termination actions (assignment of janitorial duties, denial of a 4% raise, and the denial of the plaintiff’s request to be transferred away from a difficult inmate). The Court concluded that the plaintiff did not meet her burden to establish retaliation on those claims.</p> <p> In regard to her termination, however, the plaintiff put forth evidence that the employer discharged some employees—but not all—who used excessive force with juveniles. This created a fact issue as to whether the plaintiff’s discharge would have occurred “but for” her exercising her rights. The Court remanded the case for further consideration.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about workplace matters, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p>  </p> <p><b>Contact Keith Clouse</b> </p> <p><strong>KEITH A. CLOUSE</strong> </p> <p>Clouse Dunn LLP </p> <p>214.220.2722 214.220.3833 ( fax) keith@clousedunn.com</p> Wed, 20 Jan 2016 18:15:54 GMT Inconsistent Discipline Can Lead to Problems http://www.einpresswire.com/article/307362817/inconsistent-discipline-can-lead-to-problems http://www.einpresswire.com/article/307362817/inconsistent-discipline-can-lead-to-problems <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-01-17">01/17/2016</time> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span>, <span itemprop="addressCountry">United States</span></span></span> // <a rel="nofollow" href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com">Attorney Keith Clouse</a> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Dallas employment law attorney Keith Clouse believes, while each situation should be evaluated on its own, an employer must recognize that inconsistent discipline may lead to problems. If an employer has a <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/dallas-employment-lawyer-shares-tips-for-disciplining-employees.html" target="_blank">policy of terminating employees</a> who commit certain acts--such as theft, assaulting a coworker, or showing up late more than five times without notice--the employer should be consistent in terminating employees who commit those violations. Failure to do so not only endangers employee morale, but it also exposes the employer to potential liability.</p> <p> For example, consider a situation where two employees have trouble with punctuality, but one is verbally warned while the other is terminated. The terminated employee may claim that she was terminated because of her age. Now the employer must <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/san-antonio-court-of-appeals-addresses-disparate-discipline-in-employment-discrimination-case.html" target="_blank">defend its inconsistent discipline</a>. If an employer has a good reason to account for the difference in treatment, the employer should be able to convey that to the judge and jury. If not, the employer may have a difficult time combatting the terminated employee’s allegation.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about discipline in the workplace, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p>  </p> <p><b>Contact Keith Clouse</b> </p> <p><strong>KEITH A. CLOUSE</strong> </p> <p>Clouse Dunn LLP </p> <p>214.220.2722 214.220.3833 ( fax) keith@clousedunn.com</p> Wed, 20 Jan 2016 18:15:53 GMT EEOC Provides Information Regarding Workplace Protections for Muslims http://www.einpresswire.com/article/306571882/eeoc-provides-information-regarding-workplace-protections-for-muslims http://www.einpresswire.com/article/306571882/eeoc-provides-information-regarding-workplace-protections-for-muslims <p><time itemprop="datePublished" datetime="2016-01-10">01/10/2016</time> // <span itemprop="contentLocation" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Place"><span itemprop="address" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/PostalAddress"><span itemprop="addressLocality">Dallas</span>, <span itemprop="addressRegion">Texas</span>, <span itemprop="addressCountry">United States</span></span></span> // <a rel="nofollow" href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com">Attorney Keith Clouse</a> // Keith Clouse </p> <p> Dallas employer lawyer Keith Clouse notes that the <a href="http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/muslim_middle_eastern_employers.cfm" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission</a> recently issued a statement and provided information regarding workplace protections for individuals who are, or who are perceived to be, Muslim or Middle Eastern. In light of recent attacks both in America and elsewhere, the EEOC reiterates that <a href="http://dallasemploymentlawyer.cdklawyers.com/religious-discrimination-explained-by-dallas-employment-lawyer.html" target="_blank">discrimination in the workplace</a> based on religion, national origin, or race is strictly prohibited by law.</p> <p> The EEOC created its guidance in an easy-to-read question and answer format, using scenarios an employer might face. For example, may a retail employer refuse to hire a female Muslim woman who wears a hijab (head covering) because it might bother customers? No, doing so would be the same as refusing to hire the woman because she is Muslim. Or, how should a manager respond when an Arab-American employee complains that a coworker regularly calls him names, such as “the local terrorist” or “ISIS?” The manager must take steps to correct the coworker’s behavior and to ensure that such harassment stops.</p> <p> To speak to an employment law attorney about workplace discrimination, send an email to debra@clousedunn.com or call (214) 239-2705. This article is presented by the Dallas employment law lawyers at Clouse Dunn LLP.</p> <p>  </p> <p><b>Contact Keith Clouse</b> </p> <p><strong>KEITH A. CLOUSE</strong> </p> <p>Clouse Dunn LLP </p> <p>214.220.2722 214.220.3833 ( fax) keith@clousedunn.com</p> Fri, 15 Jan 2016 17:31:03 GMT